Judgment

HEGDE, J.- The appellant was tried and convicted by the Sessions Judge of Kolaba for offences under Section 302 as well as under Section 376, I.P.C. For the former offence, he was sentenced to death and for the latter to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years. The two sentences were ordered to run concurrently. In appeal the High Court of Maharashtra confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court. Thereafter the appellant has submitted this appeal from jail after obtaining special leave from this Court.

2. In brief, the prosecution case is that on October 13, 1967, the appellant raped and thereafter killed a young girl by name Lata aged about nine years at Alibagh in Kolaba District. The deceased was permanently living with her parents at Poona. Her mother herself and her younger brother had come to Alibagh where her grandmother lived, a few days before the occurrence. On the date of the occurrence it is said that the appellant came to the house of the grandmother of the deceased at about 4 p.m. and enquired for the maternal uncle of the deceased. On being told that he was not at home he (the appellant) left the place. Very soon thereafter, the deceased also left her house. Thereafter she did not return to the house. When the maternal uncle of the deceased P. W. 2, Mahadeo came to the house at 5 p. m., his mother and his sister (mother of the deceased) told him that the deceased who had gone out had not come back. Therefore he went in search for her. Though he searched for her in various places he could not find her. Thereafter he went and reported in the police station that his niece was missing. Sometime thereafter the dead body of the deceased was found in a hut near the sea-shore. It was found that she had been raped and strangled. Subsequently P. W. 2 again went and made a report to the police station accusing the appellant of having murdered his niece. After recording the complaint, the police with the assistance of the local people made a search for the appellant. He was not found in his house. Later at about 9-30 p. m. he was seen returing to his house. At that time the people of the locality attempted to catch hold of him but seeing the same he jumped down from the bridge over which he was passing and ran towards the sea and laid himself flat at a dark spot. Ultimately he was found and caught hold of by his pursuers. Afterwards the police came there and arrested him.

3. The case against the appellant rests entirely on circumstantial evidence. Therefore we have first to see whether the circumstances put forward have been satisfactorily established. Next we have to see whether all or any of those circumstances are incriminating in character and whether the proved circumstances are such as to establish a reasonably conclusive case against the appellant. Those circumstances must not only be compatible with his guilt but they should also be incompatible with his innocence. In other words they must not be capable of suggesting any reasonable hypothesis other than the guilt of the appellant. There must be a chain of circumstances so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused ; see Hanumant v. State of Madhya Pradesh.

4. We shall now examine the circumstances held to have been established against the appellant on the basis of the tests noticed above. The High Court agreeing with the Trial Court has come to the conclusion that the following seven circumstances have been established against the appellant :

(1) The appellant visited the residence of the grandmother of the deceased at about 4 p. m. on October 13, 1967 and there made enquiries about P. W. 2 and his cousin Zumbar. Finding that they were not at home, he went away ;

(2) Almost immediately after the appellant left that place, the deceased also left her house telling her grandmother that she would return within a short time but she never returned. Later her dead body was found in one of the cottag